1) That's a nice further way to think about void that jives with what the teachings I study say about "the void," or "Annwn" in the Dolmen Arch course - it is pure potentiality.
2) On the translation, ah, that's interesting. Neither Otto nor Harvey directly address that, that I remember, but it would make sense if übernatural has very different connotations than English "supernatural," which nevertheless is the most straightforward translation. Of course, also, this is my Druid training coming out, as I get grumbly about what is and isn't "nature."
3) Ah, that's interesting about Iamblichus, but perhaps shouldn't surprise me. Of course, I was a little flippant in the post, but notionally, the cards, lots, and so forth are meant as tools for fostering this very attention to the movement of divine and other-than-human forces.
4) On sports, absolutely. Despite not being the most athletic fellow, I rely on a lot of sports metaphors for conveying what learning how to do public speaking is like (I teach a Business Communications class, so public speaking is one of the main focuses). If you'd like a discussion of the spiritual, or at least quasi-spiritual, aspects of high level sport, Josh Waitzkin is fantastic. His book The Art of Learning focuses on learning the kind of skills governed by tacit knowledge very deeply, and how to integrate tacit and declarative knowledge in their pursuit. He's working on a new book, but has been for a few years, so not sure when it will come out, but some of his interviews with Tim Ferriss give a good flavor of what he's about.
5) Lastly, well-said. I suppose I should no longer be surprised by how poorly objective, managerial techniques of understanding and improving apply to some new field I hadn't before considered, since it's become quite a pattern as I look more deeply into lots of things. I think Taylorism is a dandy, if far narrower than originally hoped, tool, but the last century and some change have seen us way over-apply it.
no subject
1) That's a nice further way to think about void that jives with what the teachings I study say about "the void," or "Annwn" in the Dolmen Arch course - it is pure potentiality.
2) On the translation, ah, that's interesting. Neither Otto nor Harvey directly address that, that I remember, but it would make sense if übernatural has very different connotations than English "supernatural," which nevertheless is the most straightforward translation. Of course, also, this is my Druid training coming out, as I get grumbly about what is and isn't "nature."
3) Ah, that's interesting about Iamblichus, but perhaps shouldn't surprise me. Of course, I was a little flippant in the post, but notionally, the cards, lots, and so forth are meant as tools for fostering this very attention to the movement of divine and other-than-human forces.
4) On sports, absolutely. Despite not being the most athletic fellow, I rely on a lot of sports metaphors for conveying what learning how to do public speaking is like (I teach a Business Communications class, so public speaking is one of the main focuses). If you'd like a discussion of the spiritual, or at least quasi-spiritual, aspects of high level sport, Josh Waitzkin is fantastic. His book The Art of Learning focuses on learning the kind of skills governed by tacit knowledge very deeply, and how to integrate tacit and declarative knowledge in their pursuit. He's working on a new book, but has been for a few years, so not sure when it will come out, but some of his interviews with Tim Ferriss give a good flavor of what he's about.
5) Lastly, well-said. I suppose I should no longer be surprised by how poorly objective, managerial techniques of understanding and improving apply to some new field I hadn't before considered, since it's become quite a pattern as I look more deeply into lots of things. I think Taylorism is a dandy, if far narrower than originally hoped, tool, but the last century and some change have seen us way over-apply it.
Cheers,
Jeff